arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Walter Philipp.
We present a modified local realistic model, based on instruction sets that can be used to approximately reproduce the data of the Pan et al experiment. The data of our model are closer to the results of the actual experiment by Pan et al than the predictions of their quantum mechanical model. As a consequence the experimental results can not be used to support their claim that quantum nonlocality has been proven.
The theorem of Bell states that certain results of quantum mechanics violate inequalities that are valid for objective local random variables. We show that the inequalities of Bell are special cases of theorems found ten years earlier by Bass and stated in full generality by Vorob'ev. This fact implies precise necessary and sufficient mathematical conditions for the validity of the Bell inequalities. We show that these precise conditions differ significantly from the definition of objective local variable spaces and as an application that the Bell inequalities may be violated even for objective local random variables.
It is a widespread current belief that objective local models can not explain the quantum optics experiment of Pan et al. By presenting a model that operates on independent computers, we show that this belief is unfounded. Three remote computers (Alice, Bob and Claire), that never communicate with each other, send measurement results to a fourth computer that is in charge of collecting the data and computing correlations. The result obtained by our local simulation is in better agreement with the ideal quantum result than the Pan et al. experiment. We also show that the local model presented by Pan et al. that can not explain the quantum results contains inappropriate reasoning with profound consequences for the possible results of any local model that uses probability theory.
Most of the standard proofs of the Bell theorem are based on the Kolmogorov axioms of probability theory. We show that these proofs contain mathematical steps that cannot be reconciled with the Kolmogorov axioms. Specifically we demonstrate that these proofs ignore the conclusion of a theorem of Vorob'ev on the consistency of joint distributions. As a consequence Bell's theorem stated in its full generality remains unproven, in particular, for extended parameter spaces that are still objective local and that include instrument parameters that are correlated by both time and instrument settings. Although the Bell theorem correctly rules out certain small classes of hidden variables, for these extended parameter spaces the standard proofs come to a halt. The Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) approach is based on similar fallacious arguments. For this case we are able to present an objective local computer experiment that simulates the experimental test of GHZ performed by Pan, Bouwmeester, Daniell, Weinfurter and Zeilinger and that directly contradicts their claim that Einstein-local elements of reality can neither explain the results of quantum mechanical theory nor their experimental results.
We show that the proofs of Gill as well as of Gill, Weihs, Zeilinger and Zukowski contain serious mathematical and physical deficiencies which render them invalid.
Mermin states that his nontechnical version of Bell's theorem stands and is not invalidated by time and setting dependent instrument parameters as claimed in one of our previous papers. We identify deviations from well-established protocol in probability theory as well as mathematical contradictions in Mermin's argument and show that Mermin's conclusions are therefore not valid: his proof does not go forward if certain possible time dependencies are taken into account.
We show that all proofs of Bell-type inequalities, as discussed in Bell's well known book and as claimed to be relevant to Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen type experiments, come to a halt when Einstein-local time and setting dependent instrument parameters are included.
Myrvold and Appleby claim that our model for EPR experiments is non-local and that previous proofs of the Bell theorem go through even if our setting and time dependent instrument parameters are included. We show that their claims are false.
The Einstein-locality of our EPR model has been questioned. We show that our model obeys Einstein locality and that the questions are without basis.
We show that Mermin's reasoning against our refutation of his non-technical proof for Bell-type inequalities is of limited significance or contains mathematical inconsistencies that, when taken into account, do not permit his proof to go forward. Our refutation therefore stands.
Mermin states in a recent paper that his nontechnical version of Bell's theorem stands and is not invalidated by time and setting dependent instrument parameters as claimed in one of our previous papers. We identify a number of misinterpretations (of our definitions) and mathematical inconsistencies in Mermin's paper and show that Mermin's conclusions are therefore not valid: his proof does not go forward if certain possible time dependencies are taken into account.
We discuss a class of proofs of Bell-type inequalities that are based on tables of potential outcomes. These proofs state in essence: if one can only imagine (or write down in a table) the potential outcome of a hidden parameter model for EPR experiments then a contradiction to experiment and quantum mechanics follows. We show that these proofs do not contain hidden variables that relate to time or, if they do, lead to logical contradictions that render them invalid.
We analyze the assumptions that are made in the proofs of Bell-type inequalities for the results of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen type of experiments. We find that the introduction of time-like random variables permits the construction of a broader mathematical model which accounts for all correlations of variables that are contained in the time dependent parameter set of the backward light cone. It also permits to obtain the quantum result for the spin pair correlation, a result that contradicts Bell's inequality. Two key features of our mathematical model are (i) the introduction of time operators that are indexed by the measurement settings and appear in addition to Bell's source parameters and (ii) the related introduction of a probability measure for all parameters that does depend on the analyzer settings. Using the theory of B-splines, we then show that this probability measure can be constructed as a linear combination of setting dependent subspace product measures and that the construction guarantees Einstein-separability.